On Buck Sexton’s radio program of February 21, 2017, the topic of the Left’s obsession with discrediting President Trump came up in a phone call concerning the vulgar remarks Trump made years ago about being sexually aggressive with women.
Sexton made the point that the Left’s outrage was selective when one considers the very serious allegations against Bill Clinton of actual rape which, according to Sexton, have never been publicly rebuked by Clinton. I thought about this and also did not recall any Bill Clinton public repudiation of the charge of rape.
I checked around a little, thinking that if any denial by Bill Clinton was made it would show up pretty fast in a Google search. I didn’t find anything. The only denials mentioned connected to Bill Clinton were made through his lawyers, not by the former President himself.
Now, more than nine months later, the past escapades of Mr. Clinton are raising eyebrows, and anger, from an unexpected direction; from liberal women politicians and news commentators. This is quite a shift from when Clinton was president. The leftist media of the 1990’s went full out ‘blame the victim’ when Billy boy’s transgressions were revealed.
Reaping What They Have Sown
Such selective outrage gives rise to the charge of hypocrisy on the part of the Left. During the campaign, this was an attempt by the Left to claim the moral high ground against President Trump. By attempting to claim superior morality, the Left is stating that, as far as they are concerned, facts do not matter when meting out moral judgment.
What the Left did not realize is when the ugly truth is ignored long enough, eventually, there will be someone who will not be satisfied to let the ugliness continue. It is popularly known as the power of ‘karma.’ Biblically, it is known as the law of reaping and sowing.
In the New Testament book of Galatians, chapter six, Paul writes:
Do not be deceived, God is not mocked. For whatever a man sows, that he will also reap, becaue the one who sows to the flesh will reap corruption from the flesh, but the one who sows to the Spirit will reap eternal life from the Spirit.
Secular education’s influence has for many decades in our land sowed “to the flesh” with the teaching of moral relativism in our public education system. They are now ‘reaping’ the results of such with the recent revelations outing the sexual predators in positions of power. Their perch on the ‘moral high ground,’ has begun to crumble.
Moral Relativism is the Immoral Seed
A key feature of moral relativism is the idea that ethics are “situational” in nature. That is, ethical behavior is determined by the situation rather than by moral principles. Virtually any kind of behavior can be considered morally good, or ethical, according to the situation at hand.
In this situation, the Left’s condemnation of President Trump is considered a moral imperative even if he is not deserving of such condemnation. For the leftist, right and wrong are interchangeable concepts as long as they advance the Left’s agenda.
In point of fact, the sexual misconduct emerging into the light today is serious, but it is not the only or even the worst example of moral relativism being exhibited by the Left. The worst application of this immoral morality has come in the form of the violent protests by groups like Black Lives Matter and Antifa. It has allowed them to engage in fascist behavior in pursuit of anti-fascism and claim they are doing the right thing.
Moral Relativism Expressed as Violent Protest
How does such illogical behavior come from the Left? It should be no real surprise that this has occurred. In fact, one might wonder why it has taken so long. After all, moral relativism and situation ethics have been around for awhile in higher education.
To Illustrate this, examine the book “Situation Ethics: The New Morality” by Joseph Fletcher. Though he did not invent the idea, he codifies it nicely. In chapter 7, Fletcher puts forth the concept that the ends do justify the means.
This is considered ethical by Fletcher because, he reasons, nothing else can justify the means other than to accomplish a particular end. One example Fletcher cites enlightens us as to what he means.
It is related in Soviet Russia how Nikolai Lenin once tired of being told by Tolstoyan idealists that his willingness to use force, in foreign and civil wars, proved that he had no ethics, that since violence is evil (not ‘can’ be but is), and since his principles allow him to use it, he, therefore, must believe that the end justifies the means. He finally rounded on them: ‘If the end does not justify the means, then in the name of sanity and justice, what does?’ To this question, he never got an answer…’
Lenin believed he was morally justified to the extent of using violence and murder of millions to further his political ends. The leftist who uses selective outrage is following the same road of action and moral justification that a tyrant like Lenin followed. In fact, the Left’s protester culture promotes and commits violence as their moral reaction to the election of President Trump.
The Left’s Moral High Ground is Phony and Dangerous
This is but a cursory examination of the nature of leftist’s immoral morality. It can be seen in just about every area where the Left has significant influence. Recently we have seen this in entertainment, government, and the so-called mainstream media.
The phoniness of this morality is clear. Rather than being a high ground where they can lecture the rest of us about ethics, it is a pit of vipers that have them eating each other. However, most of America has not recognized how phony are the morals of Antifa and Black Lives Matter and other violent leftists. Most of us have also not yet understood how dangerous this is.
The Danger of the Radical Muslim Alliance
The danger here is not directly tied to violent protests. It is the danger that the Left embraces when it teams with Muslims against the president. In case the Left hasn’t noticed, Muslims also practice a form of situational ethics. It is called taquiyya or deception, and it permits Muslims to practice jihad by lying to others about Islam.
If the Left believes cooperation with radical Muslims is an endorsement of their values, they are in for a rude awakening. Sooner or later, the tenets of Islam will impose themselves upon the Left and crush them. That is because Islam despises what the Left holds dear.
I have an answer for Lenin’s question, and Fletcher’s question as well. The answer is that there are some means which are not ethical no matter the end. Therefore, there are some ends which are inherently immoral. I suggest that the leftist vision of a socialistic utopia is an immoral goal which is only sincerely pursued with unethical means.
“Situation Ethics; The New Morality”, Joseph Fletcher, Westminster Press, 1966
Holman Christian Standard Bible, Holman Bible Publishers, 2009
Featured and Top Image Courtesy of Laurent Sauvebois Flickr page – Creative Commons License